114 comments:

I love the guy's policies and communication skills, but he's borderline disgusting fat. He has that below the belt paunch like Charlie Weis or Bill Parcells that goes well beyond "middle aged guy with a beer gut" and into "morbidly obese". He needs to drop 40-50 lbs. if he wants a shot at winning, but 75-100 would be better.

He's awfully fat, but wouldn't he have an advantage with the fat vote? How many middle-aged Americans look like Obama? If Christie could drop about 40-50 pounds, he'd still be fat, but not alarmingly so.

Christie would clobber Obama in debate. Americans are ready for a no-BS kind of guy, and that's sure not the president.

Christie's not a conservative, but if he's willing to try to get the country's economic house in order, I'd vote for him.

Christie is no good because he is a libtard. He is for "sensible" gun control, with the "sense" determination being in the hands of our present overlords.

He is just an enabler, he wants to cut back the cancer so that it does not kill the patient in the immediate future. The better to milk many more years of legalized graft and corruption off the unsuspecting public.

Fiscal responsibility without unrooting the entire system of some people living offf the production of others will never work.

Christie is superficialy appealing to the Steve-o-sphere (vdare, HBD, etc.) because his "straight talk" persona gives the impression he might be open to some hard truths.

Certainly public sector unions are out of control, and in and of itself it's good to take them on. But even so, the entire government debt crisis could be met by raising taxes on the rich to European levels (with no loopholes) and eliminating social security and medicaid for the rich.

That wouldn't be a good thing, but it would not be the end of the world either.

Where Christie is TERRIBLE is on the much more serious issue of immigration. He's not simply a tool of the fat cat cheap labor lobbies -- he seems to be something worse: a Bush-type true believer in amnesty, open borders, the whole package.

Nobody in the Steve-o-sphere should have this guy as their first choice in the absence of a clear 180 on immigration, with no wriggle room. President McCain would have passed the DREAM Amnesty and maybe something worse because he could have counted on all Dems plus some Republican RINOs and simple party loyalists. President Christie might well do the same thing -- and sell it in the same mavericky, "realistic-solution-to-a-tough-problem" kind of way.

I live in New Jersey and rumor has it Christie said "I'd sooner commit suicide" when asked if he would make a run for president. Of course, people sometimes wind up contradicting themselves. Heck, look at all the college coaches who said they'd never go pro and spoil a great college gig who then wound up being failures at the next level a couple of years later. Time will tell I guess.

OK, unfortunately he's very fat. And if the biggest prize in all of politics won't be enough of a motivation for him to slim down, then he most likely doesn't deserve it,

However, he's very charismatic. From what I understand, he's half Sicilian and half WASP. To me his personality reflects the best of those two worlds. He has a streetwise, you-ain't-fooling-me, who-are-you-kidding sort of directness, and yet he also seems like a serious, perhaps even a principled person. Neither too cynical nor too naive.

I've seen him be pretty engaging in both interviews and speeches. He's fun to watch on TV. And Obama is even worse on that score than the average politician.

Don't the voters (hypocritically) want someone who at least appears physically fit? Also, due to the superficiality of the public, no balding or very short guy will be seeing the oval office any time soon.

If establishment Republicans pick the candidate, we'll get retread from the 2008 Republican primary campaign. I'm sorry, but I'd rather the Republicans take full control of the legislature and the voters reelect Obama then get Huckabee or Romney as president.

What I'd like is a closet right wing ideologue put forward by the Tea Party who then immediately acts on his beliefs, drastically paring back entitlements, ending affirmative action, using Obama's hate crime law to prosecute the 40,000 blacks every year who rape white women, sign legislation to end automatic citizenship for anchor babies, stop all mass immigration, and work to repatriate the bulk of Mexicans in the US sponging of the white taxpayers as faux citizens.

Pushing a constitutional amendment to outlaw Islam might be a nice touch, too.

I like the idea that people care more about issues than cosmetics. His health is certainly important and obesity is bad for one's health, but in my lifetime, we've had Ike with several heart attacks(yeah, I was a kid), Kennedy with ailments hidden from the public, throwing down uppers and downers and pain killers left and right, Johnson with a heart condition, Reagan, who was of an age at which he may have begun showing sigs of mental lapses.

It's now clear that Bill Clinton's arteries were clogged at a fairly young age and that even though he didn't have his several heart incidents until after his terms, he could just as easily have had a major coronary while he was in office and have dropped dead, especially with Monica sucking on him.

And, let us not forget that there just had to be and still is something very, very wrong with Jimmy Carter, no?So, give me fat and passionate and a good VP.

BTW, I want CC to stay governor, just as he said he would. I am impressed with Daniels. Heard him talk today.

Well there's one diet where the exercise is optional. Adderall: Weight Loss Fix of the Stars?Celeb Rumors Suggest Starlets Abuse the Pill to Slim Downhttp://abcnews.go.com/Health/Diet/story?id=4515712&page=2

He's too fat to get elected President. Americans think being fat is a character flaw. Obama does too - he's always surrounded by thin white guys.

But, I am a big fan of Chris Christie even though I was stuck on the highway in the blizzard this past December in NJ when he was in Disney World with his family. He never admitted anything wrong and I felt his behavior was immature. He needed to be in peoples faces and not talking on the phone from Florida.

Where Christie is TERRIBLE is on the much more serious issue of immigration. He's not simply a tool of the fat cat cheap labor lobbies -- he seems to be something worse: a Bush-type true believer in amnesty, open borders, the whole package.

Just like McCain and Huckabee and Palin and (probably) Romney.

Republicans will put up one true-believer in open borders and amnesty after another. They are the party of bug business elites and will never stab their real constituents in the back.

If you want a better immigration policy in the USA, the only option is a coalition with organized labor and Democrats at its core.

"What I'd like is a closet right wing ideologue put forward by the Tea Party who then immediately acts on his beliefs, drastically paring back entitlements, ending affirmative action, using Obama's hate crime law to prosecute the 40,000 blacks every year who rape white women, sign legislation to end automatic citizenship for anchor babies, stop all mass immigration, and work to repatriate the bulk of Mexicans in the US sponging of the white taxpayers as faux citizens."

Ron Paul is old, but he's still sharper than most of the other Republicans that want to occupy the Whitehouse. He's also principled and more immigration restrictionist than anyone on the right. Paul needs to move toward a legal immigration restrictionist position and for higher tarrifs, but his heart is in the right place. When I vote in the primaries, I'm voting Paul.

Huckabee - Pro-amnesty, neoconservative, Bush Republican

Romney - Maybe the 2nd best after Paul, but opportunistic and untrustworth

Palin - incompetent and easily manipulated, and similar to Bush

Giuliani - Another McCain

Gingrich - Too much baggage and too pro-amnesty

Pawlenty - Maybe, need to know more

No way do I want another Obama term. Neither should you - unless you want amnesty, big government, socialism, and hyperinflation.

Obama is still pretty likely to be re-elected, absent a 1979-80 style meltdowm, which is not entirely out of the question. Does it really matter? In the long run, probably not, because the long term demographic and economic die was cast 25 years ago, if not before. The USA will not exist, at least as we know it today, 50 years from now. The USA -- or what's left of it -- will be a corrupt, dysfunctional quasi-3rd world country. The only difference between us and Mexico will be that the rest of world holds no grudge against the Mexicans and isn't especially interested in kicking them while they're down. I doubt we'll be so fortunate.

OK. Looked at the guy. He looks much better with his jacket on than off. Even at a more appropriate weight this is a big man! Obama might look childlike beside him which could be a new way to capitalize on appearance. I think you'd have to play with images of him beside Obama some to see what might happen with the juxtaposition.

Taft's 'Duties of a Citizen' is a classic. Fat isn't a serious problem for a good candidate.

McCain in a fat suit is a problem. Remember Republicans slumping out of McCain rallies saying, 'Do we have to vote for the RINO?' Remember Obamanoids marching out of Obama rallies chanting, 'Yes We Can!' Remember who won in a landslide? McCain is not on our side. We did not vote for him. Obama is on the liberal Democrat side. They did vote for him. McCain in a fat suit is not on our side. We will not vote for him.

Of course NJ isn't a conservative stronghold and any Republican elected there is going to be liberal. Fine, big tent good. But the liberal Democrat media is going to pump up every liberal Republican as long as it hurts conservatives, then dump him the moment he runs against a Democrat. McCain got that treatment. McCain in a fat suit will get that treatment.

If these were ordinary times, I'd say that his weight was enough to hold him back, but these are not ordinary times and CC is no ordinary guy for a pol.

He has charisma, something no one has ever been able to define.

Obama's never had "charisma"--he has had a narrative that he and others spun for him. Race was/is(?) part of that narrative, but never, ever has Obama's personality been the reason for others attraction for him.

"Any democracy that _insists_ that it's[sic] elected officials be pretty enough ... deserves what it gets.

Looks and talent don't necesssarily go together."

Oh, please. Nobody's talking pretty here. Christie is obese, probably morbidly obese, which would make his health and his physical ability to govern as POTUS a legitimate issue in a presidential campaign.

True, looks and talent don't necessarily go together but self-discipline is usually needed to make full use of one's talents. It's natural to view an obese person as lacking that discipline.

Obama took single women 70-29, so that pretty much proves hunk or bust for Women voters. That's the way women are. Obama is the Uber-Alpha male of Alpha Males, primarily because he's (a) Black and (b) Celebs/etc. bow down to him.

The problem is White women. They'll always go for the hunk candidate, all else being equal, and always for the non-White guy (because White guy = dork for most of them, culturally, socially, etc.) Just look at advertising's message of dorky White guy.

Paul is too old and cranky (that sunk McCain). Palin is detested by White women. Guiliani is too old and sick. Romney too old and smooth and Mormon. I really, really HATE the guy (his son hung a stray dog) but Huckabee appeals to the Oprah voter.

Look, the future of America hinges on if Obama can by fiat simply make 50 million Mexicans citizens in his second term, or a guy like Huckabee who'd NEED Republicans/Tea Party can appeal to the Oprah viewer/voter.

Hey, Truth, be honestt--you know as well as I do that Guiliani doomed himself from the get-go with bad decisions about when to get into the primaries."

I'll give you my opinion on Christie/ Guliani et all.

We will not see another businesslike, Eastern, tough-talking president anytime soon, maybe in my lifetime. Back in the film noir era, this type of guy symbolized America, but he has been supplanted, since Kennedy, by the warmer southern/midwestern/California type.

We like politicians whom we can indentify with, and outside of the northeastern seaboard, they just don't make the Chris Christie, Howard Dean, Bill Bradley, John Kerry, Guliani, Michael Bloomberg type, get the job done guy, so the voter in TN, WV, AZ or IN is not going to vote for someone he just does not have a heartfelt connection to.

Think about it. it seemed as though Dean, Bradley, Guliani, and especially Kerry SHOULD have been president. They all lost to the midwestern/southern type (you could easily throw Hillary Clinton in there as well, she projects as a snotty Eastern paternal type). Obama is not "warm" but you couldn't describe him as cold, and most objective people would say that he is "likeable."

Pretending for a second that the president race is not fixed years in advance (it is) There are only three Republicans I have seen that could give Obama a serious race, Ron Paul (TX, ostensibly), Rand Paul (KY, capitalizing on his father's fame) or, most likely Joe Scarborough, easily the Republican with the best chance to defeat Obama in a fair election.

Obama will probably face either Thune or Palin in what will probably be the most one sided race since Regan - Mondale.

It's more than charisma. Chris Christie is the best and most commanding extemporaneous speaker in American politics, by far. It's a combination of his command of the facts, his powerful voice, the perfect pacing of his speech, and his ability to think on his feet and respond intelligently to questions in real time.

However, he's very charismatic. From what I understand, he's half Sicilian and half WASP. To me his personality reflects the best of those two worlds.

Uh, no. Christie is not "half WASP". But I guess if Dubya can pass himself off as a good ol' boy and Obama can pass for a Baptist preacher, then you weren't completely unjustified in thinking it was a possibility.

Christie is an attack dog, like Cheney or Biden. Look for whoever gets the nomination to pick Christie as Veep. Plus he brings along a Northeastern state that could (theoretically) swing either way. Christie as VP.

Those of us here in NJ who like him do so because he's obviously one of us, unlike the Goldman slimeball Corzine or the creepy-even-before-he-came-out McGreevey. He told NY to go screw itself, which is something we all agree with. The rest of the country can go screw as well, we're happy keeping him.

"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."

Ironically in this case, it is the fat guy who has more of that lean and hungry look. I don't think it can be said of Obama that he "thinks too much". Perhaps Christy should take up smoking like Obama did - it's a good way to control weight.

Well, Christy is a Republican and a New Jersey one at that, so there must be something wrong with him - For gun control? Pro-immigration? A Wall Street Journal approved lackey of the National Chamber of Commerce? Check, check, and check. No thanks.

Hmmm... is a Scots-Irish/Sicilian cross bound to be doubly explosive, or would the two strains cancel each other out? The closest example that comes to mind is the Italian-Irish-English-German Al Smith. That's too diverse for stereotype to be of use.

Christie's problem, or, rather, our problem with Christie, is that he is the best candidate on one of the two most important issues, and the worst on the other: spending and immigration. I say we have to hammer it home-- and not just to Christie, but to all candidates, and all voters, in both parties-- that the two stances are incompatible.

Every immigrant (and sponsor and employer thereof) should be made to fill out a Fiscal Impact Statement or Subsidy Disclosure Form. E.g., Hector has three niños in public school, costing $25,000 a year, but makes $23,500 as a janitor. Who covers the rest?

Throw in the Environmental Impact Statement already required of businesses, and I don't see how any candidate in either party can support even a tenth of present immigration levels without exposing himself as a fraud.

"most likely Joe Scarborough, easily the Republican with the best chance to defeat Obama in a fair election.

"Obama will probably face either Thune or Palin in what will probably be the most one sided race since Regan - Mondale."

Sorry, Truth, I don't think much of your prognosticating skills.

While I will agree with you that NE types have a hard time galvanizing Red State America, an unusual character could do it.

CC isn't going to run for President for all kinds of reasons this time around (and maybe never).

Thune has already bowed out. If the GOP goes Palin, I stay home, as much as I dislike Obama.

A GOP choice of Palin will prove to me that the way we run our primaries has to go and that maybe the parties themselves need to go back to the backrooms and choose their candidates. Obama, the guy who loved voting "present," a guy who wouldn't exchange ideas with his law school colleagues, a guy who wouldn't even attend their dialogues, a guy with no political skills except reading well from a prompter....and Palin...what can I say....I don't even want to think about that as a choice.

Actually, I like Barbour. The guy is experienced in all aspects of governing and in the "art" of politics, and it is an art, the art of persuasion. As a long-time Dem, a fairly liberal one at that, until the mid nineties, I never, ever thought I'd like such a guy.

However, I just don't think Barbour can get enough indies to go for his Boss Hogg looks and drawl. They say that guy is quite the charming pol in small groups.

Christie critics forget that governors have different perspectives than presidents. If Christie ran for president, he would be forced to think about the connection between immigration and the national budget (states, after all, can't control their borders or have immigration policies). Christie doesn't seem like the kind of guy who tolerates contradictions about basic policies. His fiscal conservatism will invariably make him an immigration restrictionist (at least a restrictionist of unskilled immigration). He's not stupid.

Yeah. Except he's more intelligent and not crazy. If we have to have 'em, I prefer my open-borders zealots stupid and crazy. Less effective that way.

However, he's very charismatic. From what I understand, he's half Sicilian and half WASP. To me his personality reflects the best of those two worlds. He has a streetwise, you-ain't-fooling-me, who-are-you-kidding sort of directness, and yet he also seems like a serious, perhaps even a principled person. Neither too cynical nor too naive.

I've seen him be pretty engaging in both interviews and speeches. He's fun to watch on TV. And Obama is even worse on that score than the average politician.

If Christie ran for president, he would be forced to think about the connection between immigration and the national budget (states, after all, can't control their borders or have immigration policies).

Yes, they can, to a degree, and to the degree that they can, Christie has shown that he's not willing to make the connection between immigration/budget problems. Or rather, he's perfectly capable of seeing the connection, but only in the way a liberal can see that public-employee pensions are budget items, or an über hawk can see the amount of money in the military budget. No intrinsic policy stance flows from that recognition.

Anonymous said...The simple truth is this: we can't vote our way out of the disaster that's coming. At best all we can do is prolong the agony.

I agree with you that we're in desperate straits, but if by prolonging the agony you mean forestalling economic collapse for another 10-20 years through more responsible governance, I'm all for prolonging the agony. In the long run we are all dead anyway, as Keynes observed.

One of the things I like about Christie is that he doesn't treat reporters deferentially; he treats them as partisans who ask him questions that contain tendentious assumptions, and he attacks those assumptions. I would like to think that if Christie were in debate with Obama, he wouldn't shy away from going at him for his BS, which McCain couldn't bring himself to do.

No, I don't like him on immigration and that's important.

I don't like him on gun control either, but since even the Democrats are staying away from that Third Rail, I suspect Christie will too.

I agree that the NE personality doesn't go over well in other parts of the country and that might be a problem.

There's something to Whiskey's argument that women won't vote for a guy they can't imagine "doing." However, they may also tend to vote for a candidate whose wife they like and whose marriage seems to be good--this works for Obama. Giuliani and Gingrich, with their sleazy marital history, would probably have a problem with women voters even if they were regarded as doable.

I'm from NJ and I love the guy. In a GOP nomination fight, he would crush 5foot 6inch baldy twerp Mitch Daniels.Christie is a charming man. He would probably be one of the most electable GOP candidates (although he might not win NJ) but he's terrible on immigration.So, as much as I'd love to see the fat white dude get into a wrestling match with the skinny black metrosexual, I'd damn sure prefer an immigration restriction type at the top of the ticket, with maybe Christie as the VP choice.Is there an immigration restriction candidate who can win?Michelle Bachman?

Whiskey said, "The problem is White women. They'll always go for the hunk candidate, all else being equal, and always for the non-White guy (because White guy = dork for most of them, culturally, socially, etc.) Just look at advertising's message of dorky White guy."

You're doing it again. And after I thought we were getting along so well. In the last election, I held my nose and voted against the buff mulatto and for the rabid old white chipmunk. And so long as I live in a nation founded by whites, I doubt I will ever vote for a non-white.

As for the dorky white guy commercials, you ought to hear the withering criticism I give my non-dorky but white husband for ignoring them b/c he thinks they don't affect him. I'm working on him and have every hope he will come around.

You simply must go back to using those qualifiers we talked about when referring to white women. Let me helpfully jog your memory for you: Most. Some. Nearly all. The majority. Liberal.

To paraphrase Lincoln: whatever this guy's eating, send it to our other 49 governors.

Except as it relates to immigration. No matter how good he is on so much else, if he's wrong on dealing with immigration his tough love solutions are destined to fail in the not-too-distant future. He's only for "tough love" so long as it aligns with business interests.

Such attitudes *may* change if he goes national. I think one problem with state- and local-level politics is that the groups that pay the most attention to them and put the most money in are very interested in cheap labor - developers, etc.

"President McCain would have passed the DREAM Amnesty and maybe something worse because he could have counted on all Dems plus some Republican RINOs and simple party loyalists."

If John McCain had become president we'd now be staring down the barrel of a House and Senate that was two-thirds Democrat and filibuster-proof. Not to say that Obama hasn't been horrible, but the economy was not going to get better quickly no matter who won, because we (the government and consumers) are broke, and because our human capital is in rapid decline. That's why I'm glad that Obama won. He and Dems get the blame.

And so it starts--twenty years ago the "cultural diversity" training began in the public schools. It has moved from the training of admins and teachers to the training of students.

The high school in my town is an underperfoming one. Care to guess why? The housing boom of the last decade+ led to a huge shift of demographics, with NAMS from primarily Oakland and Richmond moving east, and choosing this community in which to settle, mostly because of a brand new super-sized high school built on a hill next to brand new, big homes.

Section 8 vouchers soared when the buyers of many of those homes found a steady, reliable renter in the form of the county.

The schools tanked, of course, and the state, taking its lead from the feds, instituted diversity training. Don't ya know that the reason so many of those kids who came were foul-mouthed, acted up in the classrooms and hallways, got into fights, brought guns and knives, was because the larger society and school community simply didn't understand cultural diversity?

The influx of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans from SoCal added the same, an initial gang element which has since abated somewhat as most of the gang family members have moved even further east. The brown kids aren't performing any better, but minus the gang influence, they are not discipline problems. One reason is they often don't come to school.

This week one of the high schools is having its final CA accreditation session. In order to show they are trying to remedy the "behavior gap," all year students have been force-fed cultural and geographic diversity training in order to show the committee they really are trying. (AFter all, they had been questioned about why behavioral referrals for black males and females were so much higher than for any other groups--because, you see, the discrepancies just can't be related to anything other than a misunderstanding of their culture and their needs.)

The brown, white, and Asian kids at the school have grown increasingly sick to their stomachs at the display of the idiocy shown by adults. Most are aware that the teachers hate the program as much as they do. The good black kids are downright embarrassed by it.

Yet, it continues.

Chris Christie, while great in addressing fiscal matters, is under the impression that if you continue to sink money into the schools, you can effect change. I can't fault him for that misconception when I thought so too for many years. AFter all, how does a politician get his information about the achievement gap? How many articles or books has he read about HBD? What experts can get access to these people when even teachers are fed social science data interpreted by idiots and advocates?

While Christie no doubt believes that the academic gap can be closed with money, I don't think he accepts a black-white-Asian behavior gap as something that can be cured with diversity training and cultural and geographic sensitivity training.

Okay, next up for the school, gay sensitivity training--they euphemistically call it bullying training; I expect shortly for some gay activist to demand they drop that term and call it what it is and that they institute a "Be a friend to a gay day."

"Christie is an attack dog, like Cheney or Biden. Look for whoever gets the nomination to pick Christie as Veep. Plus he brings along a Northeastern state that could (theoretically) swing either way. Christie as VP."

Don't think so, even though on the one level you mention, it makes some sense.

I saw him on tv about a month ago and like he always does when asked, he vociferously said he will not be running for President. Then, he was pressed about accepting a Veep spot. He started laughing and said, "Have you heard me much? Do I sound like a guy who would do well taking orders and who anyone else would want to have as a VP?" (Words close to those.)

The one thing that is refreshing about the guy is that he does seem comfortable in his own skin and that response shows he knows himself well.

He wants to be in charge. Veep might not be a good fit. On the other hand, he did work his way up the prosecutorial ladder, as all of them must, and he must have been able to work with people.

People like those who are authentic. He's authentic. That IS his personality. He likes to talk, likes to eat, likes to be the Sicilian-Irish American Jersey guy that he is."

Any candidate would clobber Obama in the 2012 presidential debates. What do you think the debates are going to be about?

In 2008 was about the vagueness of hopechangey. Now it's going to be about Obama's record. How is he going to defend any of his countless job killing maneuvers; like Obamacare, no permits for oil rigs, the failed stimulus, cash for clunkers?

The guy doesn't have a single major positive accomplishment that he can point to as a success foe his administration. He'll be stuck trying to pimp the stimulus and healthcare again, but he'll ultimately have to answer for what a disaster those bills were.

Whatever Republican wins the nomination will be the next president. The white flight from the Democrat party will be a deluge and Obama's young supporters won't show up because it's not 2008 again and they can't sell him as a rock star.

Debates arent two candidates arguing their positions, they're two candidates trying to find a path through a series of minefields--every statement must fail to offend any important group of voters, and must not yield an excerpt that will sound good in an attack ad.

Ron Paul has supported an end to birthright citizenship, drunken sailor spending, and all these quagmire-type wars for years........ and you want to vote for Christie???

I'd support a Paul-Christie north-South ticket, but I fear that Christie is too much of an establishment/neoconservative type.

Yes Christie is charming, but so was Bush in 2000. A lot of conservatives drank the Kool Aid and voted for the guy, without reservation, twice.... How'd that work out? I'm willing to back Christie if he takes reasonable positions on restricting immigration, non-interventonism, and trade restrictions (he's already good on spending), but so far I'm not ready yet. He's got potential, so we'll see how things go.

Seriously, I really don't think that as a candidate for the governor's seat in NJ he had to think about immigration.

My bet is he hasn't even looked at the stats of states like CA, NEV, AZ, NM, etc.

He is close enough to his immigrant roots that I am sure he has sympathy for those whose families haven't been here long--legally--but he knows nothing about the issue and its fiscal impact to say nothing of the social ills of mass immigration because that is not what he is dealing with in NJ.

I wish he had admitted that--that he hasn't studied the real numbers of the other states dealing with the issue.

When was our last fat president? It was definately before women's suffrage.

Hoover was in good heft. There weren't many fat presidents before women's suffrage, either. The few real tubsters were coincident with the Gilded Age-to-pre-WWI era (Cleveland, Teddy Roosevelt, Taft), when portly was in style. And the chicks did dig the porkulent Clinton.

My bet is he hasn't even looked at the stats of states like CA, NEV, AZ, NM, etc.

It should be noted that you didn't mention Texas, a state which shares a 1254 mile border with Mexico. Why not? Because the white citizens of Texas aren't the pushovers that the whites in those other four states are (Steve and the valiant citizens of Arizona excluded).

No doubt, to whites in blue states, the idea of white nationalism is an attractive one; however, to red state whites the main issue is reducing the size and power of the federal government.

I think the establishment Republicans are firmly convinced that we need to let in all immigrants in order to save entitlements..that's the only way I can explain their stubbornness on this issue. If it were strictly cheap labor and docile servants, how could they live with themselves?

Further proof that online hardcore wingers are closet cases looking for a protective thug character to shore up their inadequate masculinity. The reality is that Christie is an idiot and a blithering incompetent, no matter how much the media bolsters him. He's already cost the state hundreds of millions of Fed dollars through his stupidity. The media loves him because he's like Tony Soprano and you closet cases like him because pushes around hapless teachers and women in general. The problem is that NJ will be in the toilet for real by the primaries and he'll be toxic once the labor revival starts recalling Koch Whores like Walker.

"He's already cost the state hundreds of millions of Fed dollars through his stupidity."

If you're referring to the ridiculous commuter tunnel (which wasn't even going to go Penn Station in Manhattan, but to a spot a dozen floors below the basement of Macy's), you're the idiot. The federal money was contingent on NJ spending hundreds of millions of additional dollars it doesn't have.

"The reality is that Christie is an idiot and a blithering incompetent, no matter how much the media bolsters him. He's already cost the state hundreds of millions of Fed dollars through his stupidity."

Now, now, settle down little girl. Oh, my, you can't even lie well. We all know the media never bolsters a conservative or a Repub. In this case, it's just that CC has gotten in their faces and they can't ignore him--but "bolster."

"The media loves him because he's like Tony Soprano and you closet cases like him because pushes around hapless teachers and women in general."

Gee, my "hapless" sister, living near Matawan, just retired at age 57, last year's salary was over at 90K *not including* benefits and she will receive medical, dental, and vision coverage (top of the line Blue Shield medical) for herself and her husband until she reaches 65. She's not complaining.

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.